Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Check Out Our Sponsors
Brought to you by
Hair Loss Forum
Navigation
 Portal
 Index
 Memberlist
 Profile
 FAQ
 Search
Latest topics
» Proof that DHT is a secondary factor in MPB
Yesterday at 9:46 am by Xenon

» Regrowth Photos DT-CPR method
Yesterday at 9:21 am by iuyyighghghgkh

» T-cells & Stem cells
Wed Jun 28, 2017 11:21 pm by Benjamin Button

» Progress photos - Nicehair.org technique
Wed Jun 28, 2017 11:26 am by daybyday42

» Disgusting bald shaming on Youtube
Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:44 am by Hairbeback

» Hair Loss Revolution.
Tue Jun 27, 2017 8:27 pm by nhtindia

» ALTERNATIVE to DT- READ using acetic acid-lympth IS key!!
Tue Jun 27, 2017 9:22 am by iuyyighghghgkh

» Fascinating study
Mon Jun 26, 2017 7:49 am by Benjamin Button

» My green tea,coconut topical and green juicing progress
Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:15 am by newuser

Navigation
 Portal
 Index
 Memberlist
 Profile
 FAQ
 Search

AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Page 3 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  israelite on Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:30 pm

hairdecent wrote:how do you think scalp derma-needling (wounding) compares to brushing for forming new capillaries?
I think dermaroller would be your best option.

israelite

Posts : 185
Join date : 2011-12-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  JZ on Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:01 pm

JZ, What kind of brush are you using, how long and how often?
If you haven't read it yet, check out Ferox's advice at: http://immortalhair.forumandco.com/t7419-regrow-your-hair-with-the-ferox-method

What I do is pretty similar, minus the hanging upside-down part...which I do think is a good idea, but I haven't got organized enough to do it yet. I brush for at least 4 minutes hard, fast...maybe another 5 minutes moderately hard, if I have time. I also massage the skin by squeezing it until it folds, repeatedly, and this seems to make it very red very fast. I try to do all this sort of upside down, but, yeah, not fully hanging upside down, and the upside-down part doesn't usually happen anyway. I also do the water thing Ferox describes. All this 1/day, maybe twice if I'm bored.

I bought the stiffest 100% pure boar-bristle brush I could find (no nylon reinforcements). I can't remember the name brand off the top of my head; I don't think it's important anyway. I bought if from a store called Sally Beauty. The key thing is that the bristles are stiff enough that it hurts a little when you brush the back of your hand. The first time you brush your scalp, it'll probably hurt like hell. Hopefully other hair-care stores also have boar-bristle brushes.

how do you think scalp derma-needling (wounding) with AHK compares to brushing with AHK, for forming new capillaries?
Hmm. I don't think dermarolling/needling brings the same rush of blood into the tissue that brushing does. As far as I understand, it's the rush of blood towards capillary-deficient tissue that seriously causes new capillaries to form, and brushing is really effective here. Maybe dermarolling leads to general skin renewal and new capillaries eventually, but I bet not nearly as quickly. I don't have experience with dermarolling though, so someone else might want to comment.

JZ

Posts : 42
Join date : 2011-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  JZ on Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:41 pm

Okay, it's a "Brush Strokes" (TM) model #217106.

JZ

Posts : 42
Join date : 2011-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  The_Mentalist on Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:18 pm

Someone on hlh forum from an old post described how he learned from Thailand that needling helps. He claimed to have filled his temples by simply needling the skin bare enough that it does not bleed and pierce slightly to stimulate hair. This he says should be done once a week. To me, it is dermarolling-makes it easier with derma rather than using a needle like stitching needle or lancets.

I have done it twice so far. I used a safet pin from stationery. And yeah it pierces well and I could feel some kind of sound making when pin punctures skin surface. Also, it gets red pretty easily and I could see vellus hair stiffening.

I am thinking of tryng dermaroller. Can anyone direct me to one on ebay or amazon exactly? What size should I be looking for. I am thinking 1mm?

The_Mentalist

Posts : 33
Join date : 2012-06-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  The_Mentalist on Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:20 pm

sc871 wrote:
JZ wrote:

Yes, 2/3 ethanol to 1/3 PG sounds about ideal.

I think the idea is to have both alcohol (or water), which is absorbed quickly, and PG, which is absorbed slowly. I have read of numerous different formulas; usually the fraction of PG is about 1/5 to 1/3.

I can't think of any reason not to mix AHK with minox solution. Other people have done this. I have not heard that they would cross-react or anything.



That is ton of ethanol, which is not good for the skin, where did you come up with that high amount of ethanol?

I have heard of a number of people mixing ahk in minox solution, never heard anything direct about them cross reacting but a number of people suggest not to combine the two as they thought it was less efecttive .

The Mentalist, here is a link to some PG http://www.amazon.com/Essential-Depot-PROPYLENE-GLYCOL-PINT-Propylene-Glycol/dp/B005F5KYM4/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343151543&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=prolyene+glycol

Sc,

that pg is expensive. Can you tell me if 50% of ethy alcohol, maybe 30% of glycerine, and 20% of water would be ideal for any such mix?

If you are in the US, can you name a store that might carry PG or should I just go for glycerin instead?

The_Mentalist

Posts : 33
Join date : 2012-06-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  LawOfThelema on Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:38 pm

10 dollar is expensive?

LawOfThelema

Posts : 949
Join date : 2012-05-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  The_Mentalist on Wed Jul 25, 2012 5:03 pm

^ yeah, considering that alcohols, re hardly no more than 3 dollars for adecent size

The_Mentalist

Posts : 33
Join date : 2012-06-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  JZ on Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:23 pm

One $10 pint of PG will last a long time. In six months I've used maybe 1/3 of a pint.

JZ

Posts : 42
Join date : 2011-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  The_Mentalist on Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:43 pm

jz,

what does are you using for ahk? I know it should be 2.5% ideally, but what is the frequency of use per day/week? Sorry if you have aready mentioned

The_Mentalist

Posts : 33
Join date : 2012-06-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  mikeyc on Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:39 pm

Phew thats a relief I thought we might get to "Preperation H" Shocked Laughing Laughing Laughing

Cheers
Mikeyc.
JZ wrote:
That is ton of ethanol, which is not good for the skin, where did you come up with that high amount of ethanol?
It is indeed a lot of ethanol, and I agree that ethanol is probably not great for the skin. Neither is PG, for that matter (it's considered a skin irritant), though I personally don't have a reaction to it. Whether the harshness of ethanol or PG will make a long-term difference probably depends on the person.

In some of the original AHK-Cu studies, they gave suggested formulas for the solution. I got this information second-hand; I haven't read the original studies. I could try to find them though.

Anyway, here's what I wrote down.
Preparation A:
Peptide-Copper Complex 1.0% (w/w)
Hydroxy Ethyl Cellulose 3.0% (w/w)
Propylene Glycol 20.0% (w/w)
Nonoxynol-9 3.0% (w/w)
Benzyl Alcohol 2.0% (w/w)
Aqueous Phosphate Buffer (0.2N)
71.0% (w/w)

Preparation B:
Peptide-Copper Complex 1.0% (w/w)
Nonoxynol-9 3.0% (w/w)
Ethyl Alcohol 96.0% (w/w)

Preparation C:
Peptide-Copper Complex 5.0% (w/w)
Ethyl Alcohol 47.5% (w/w)
Isopropyl Alcohol 4.0% (w/w)
Propylene Glycol 20.0% (w/w)
Lanoeth-4 1.0% (w/w)
Water 27.5% (w/w)

Preparation D:
Peptide-Copper Complex 5.0% (w/w)
Sterile Water 95.0% (w/w)

Preparation E:
Peptide-Copper Complex 2.5% (w/w)
Hydroxypropyl Cellulose 2.0% (w/w)
Glycerine 20.0% (w/w)
Nonoxynol-9 3.0% (w/w)
Sterile Water 72.5% (w/w)

Preparation F:
Peptide-Copper Complex 0.5% (w/w)
Sterile Water 16.5% (w/w)
Propylene Glycol 50.0% (w/w)
Ethanol 30.0% (w/w)
Nonoxynol-9 3.0% (w/w)

Preparation G:
Peptide-Copper Complex 5.0% (w/w)
Sterile Water 10.0% (w/w)
Hydroxypropyl Cellulose 2.0% (w/w)
Propylene Glycol 30.0% (w/w)
Ethanol 50.0% (w/w)
Nonoxynol-9 3.0% (w/w)

My point is that the exact proportions of liquids is flexible. There is typically a lot of ethanol, but could use water instead if you preferred. I think you could probably use only water and AHK-Cu; it just wouldn't have as long a shelf-life. Ethanol is perhaps absorbed faster through the skin, but, in the long-term, I'm not sure how much it matters.

I have heard of a number of people mixing ahk in minox solution, never heard anything direct about them cross reacting but a number of people suggest not to combine the two as they thought it was less efecttive .
I've read that minox interferes with collagen synthesis, which is what AHK helps, so I guess they might conflict in this way. On the other hand, Dr. Pickart (AHK inventor) says:
Hideo Uno, the scientist who wrote the Monograph on Minoxidil for for the UpJohn company when Rogaine first came out, did extensive testing on both minoxidil and copper peptide. He said the two worked well together. Minoxidil was best at growing new small, thin hairs and copper peptides were best at thickening the hair.

So, I am thinking, the hair on temples etc. we see is due to combing, and not by ahk? I am unsure though, because I started doing a lot of stuff lately.
Yeah, that's the question. I used AHK for a while before I started brushing, and I did get lots of new vellus hairs. However, these did not go terminal until after I started brushing. Then they went terminal fast (7 days). At least, some of them did.

AHK is supposed to do a couple things. It reverses fibrosis of hair follicles that haven't had hair in a long time. Possibly, fibrosis could be a factor that prevents hair regrowth even if you're brushing, so AHK might be a necessary step before brushing works. Also, AHK helps the formation of capillaries to hair follicles, a necessary step for terminal hairs.

Now, brushing also helps the formation of capillaries to hair follicles, and probably does it a lot faster.

My feeling is this: AHK helps produce new vellus hairs easily, and, by helping new capillaries form, will eventually make these hairs go terminal. But it'll take a long time, whereas brushing makes it happen a lot faster. On the other hand, I think brushing might take longer to work if the follicles and surrounding tissue haven't been "prepped" by AHK.

mikeyc

Posts : 17
Join date : 2012-06-23
Age : 54
Location : perth western australia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  j87x on Thu Jul 26, 2012 6:00 am

The_Mentalist wrote:Someone on hlh forum from an old post described how he learned from Thailand that needling helps. He claimed to have filled his temples by simply needling the skin bare enough that it does not bleed and pierce slightly to stimulate hair. This he says should be done once a week. To me, it is dermarolling-makes it easier with derma rather than using a needle like stitching needle or lancets.

I have done it twice so far. I used a safet pin from stationery. And yeah it pierces well and I could feel some kind of sound making when pin punctures skin surface. Also, it gets red pretty easily and I could see vellus hair stiffening.

I am thinking of tryng dermaroller. Can anyone direct me to one on ebay or amazon exactly? What size should I be looking for. I am thinking 1mm?
owndoc.com sells them, they claim it is high quality and they are fairly priced.

j87x

Posts : 694
Join date : 2008-08-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  LawOfThelema on Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:25 pm

was 2.5% the one used in the study that showed improvement. i've heard of people going higher. i thought the typical dose was 5%

LawOfThelema

Posts : 949
Join date : 2012-05-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  hairdecent on Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:39 am

I'm not trying to upset anyone, but just thought you guys should know that the inventor of AHK-cu said that it is an old technology and has been surpassed by better copper formulations that he invented.

hairdecent

Posts : 36
Join date : 2012-04-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  NYJets on Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:41 am

hairdecent wrote:I'm not trying to upset anyone, but just thought you guys should know that the inventor of AHK-cu said that it is an old technology and has been surpassed by better copper formulations that he invented.


such as....? Which inventor are you referring too?
avatar
NYJets

Posts : 457
Join date : 2012-05-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  LawOfThelema on Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:32 am

hairdecent wrote:I'm not trying to upset anyone, but just thought you guys should know that the inventor of AHK-cu said that it is an old technology and has been surpassed by better copper formulations that he invented.

such as which formulations?

LawOfThelema

Posts : 949
Join date : 2012-05-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  j87x on Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:56 pm

LawOfThelema wrote:
hairdecent wrote:I'm not trying to upset anyone, but just thought you guys should know that the inventor of AHK-cu said that it is an old technology and has been surpassed by better copper formulations that he invented.

such as which formulations?
Pickart wasn't able to sell GHK/AHK due to some laws or something, so he started selling copper chloride. I believe he is a quack and folligen is ineffective. Folligen is the stuff everyone has been using for years with minimal results, of course he will claim it is superior because he went through the trouble of patenting and marketing it.

j87x

Posts : 694
Join date : 2008-08-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  hairdecent on Fri Jul 27, 2012 3:33 pm

It's interesting what you said about being a quack because he seems like a pretty serious scientist.
I can only tell you I was really surprised affraid by seeing, albeit a girl, get a lot of new denser growth after like 6 or 7 months of using the folligen. I don't know which copper was in it because I don't think it lists the ingredients like that.

She didn't have a norwitch problem but noticeably diffuse thin hair. She didn't do anything else but the shampoo and hairs sprouted and it got denser.

I stopped it because I didn't like the shed that happens, but maybe it's a matter of adjusting the amount used for each person.

hairdecent

Posts : 36
Join date : 2012-04-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  j87x on Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:21 pm

hairdecent wrote:It's interesting what you said about being a quack because he seems like a pretty serious scientist.
I can only tell you I was really surprised affraid by seeing, albeit a girl, get a lot of new denser growth after like 6 or 7 months of using the folligen. I don't know which copper was in it because I don't think it lists the ingredients like that.

She didn't have a norwitch problem but noticeably diffuse thin hair. She didn't do anything else but the shampoo and hairs sprouted and it got denser.

I stopped it because I didn't like the shed that happens, but maybe it's a matter of adjusting the amount used for each person.
Yeah I dunno, a few people claim to get results from it (mainly women). Copper chloride is cheaper and not as concentrated. I've emailed pickart a few times and he gives really vague replies, it almost seems like he didn't know much about the different types of peptides which was weird. I haven't seen any studies to back up his patented copper chloride, only studies for AHK/GHK which he can only claim his product is the same or better.

j87x

Posts : 694
Join date : 2008-08-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  hairdecent on Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:47 pm

He himself is bald.

Do you know if AHK-cu causes a shed like the folligen?

hairdecent

Posts : 36
Join date : 2012-04-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  j87x on Sat Jul 28, 2012 5:26 am

hairdecent wrote:He himself is bald.

Do you know if AHK-cu causes a shed like the folligen?
Here's a thread that gives better info: http://www.essentialdayspa.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=18030
Dunno about a shed.

j87x

Posts : 694
Join date : 2008-08-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  JZ on Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:16 pm


what does are you using for ahk? I know it should be 2.5% ideally, but what is the frequency of use per day/week? Sorry if you have aready mentioned
I think 2.5% is considered the minimum to be effective, according to the original studies. In the original studies they found a couple different regimes worked, from 2.5% to 5%. I think they found that 2.5% twice a day was good, as was 5% once a day.

I vary it up a bit, but I range from 3 to 5%, once a day. I do this for a couple weeks, and then I take a break for a week or two. Lately I've been using 5%.

I've heard of people using more than 5%, but there is such a thing as overdosing on copper. Also, I have read that the tissue needs a recovery period to renew properly, so that if you keep using high %s of AHK without ever taking a break, you'll actually slow the renewal process down.

JZ

Posts : 42
Join date : 2011-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  JZ on Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:44 pm

Pickart confuses me. I don't think he's a quack. He's the reason we know about GHK and AHK. But what he says nowadays seems inconsistent and perplexing.

Here's the story of Pickart and copper peptides, as I know it. Pickart discovered the tripeptide glycyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine (GHK) naturally occurring in the body and determined that it plays a role in tissue renewal. He also found that GHK is less abundant in people who are older / in poorer health. He experimented with introducing GHK-copper into the body, and saw it had the same effect as naturally occurring GHK. He called GHK-Cu "Copper Tripeptide-1". He also discovered an analogue of GHK which had a stronger effect, at least for hair growth: L-alanyl-L-histidyl-L-lysine (AHK).

In formal studies, AHK was found to have a measurable effect on increasing hair density. I still don't know the relative merits of AHK vs GHK.

But Pickart somehow lost the patents for GHK-Cu and AHK-Cu. He lost them to the company ProCyte. ProCyte used GHK-Cu in a product called Tricomin. Unfortunately, Tricomin contains very little GHK-Cu. How little? Nobody knows. They don't print the percentage. We do know that Tricomin contains blue dye. If you mix your own GHK-Cu or AHK-Cu solution you know that the liquid turns dark blue with as little as 1% concentration. So adding blue dye is either suspicious or nonsensical. (Anecdotally, I did hear of someone doing an informal assay and estimating Tricomin's GHK-Cu at 0.25% or less.)

Pickart, meanwhile, had no legal rights to GHK-Cu or AHK-Cu, so he developed the "second generation copper peptides", used in the product Folligen. These, however, were copper peptides; they were not the specific tripeptide GHK or AHK. The copper peptides in Folligen have not been formally demonstrated to increase hair density.

There are stories all over the Web of people using Tricomin and/or Folligen for long periods without seeing anything but maybe "healthier-looking" hair. These products are old news, while 2.5% GHK-/AHK-Cu is something you couldn't get until recently. Even after after the patents expired, no one sold it.

Why doesn't Dr. Pickart market GHK-AHK-Cu now? Beats me. I don't get his support for Folligen either. As I understand it, Folligen is a mixture of many kinds of peptides; some may benefit the skin/hair and some may not. None have been proven to. Pickart argues that a mixture of peptides is likely to be more beneficial than a single type. Maybe, but what if some of the pepides are actually harmful? There are stories that Folligen has a harsh effect on the skin for some people. Dr. Pickart apparently denies this, sometimes, or says that young people, with healthy skin, shouldn't be using Folligen anyway, because it might make them look older. Spectacular!

Pickart went bald before he discovered GHK/AHK. Don't know if he ever tried his discoveries on himself.

Great link, j87x.

JZ

Posts : 42
Join date : 2011-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  nidhogge on Tue Jul 31, 2012 1:48 am

The_Mentalist wrote:
sc871 wrote:
JZ wrote:

Yes, 2/3 ethanol to 1/3 PG sounds about ideal.

I think the idea is to have both alcohol (or water), which is absorbed quickly, and PG, which is absorbed slowly. I have read of numerous different formulas; usually the fraction of PG is about 1/5 to 1/3.

I can't think of any reason not to mix AHK with minox solution. Other people have done this. I have not heard that they would cross-react or anything.



That is ton of ethanol, which is not good for the skin, where did you come up with that high amount of ethanol?

I have heard of a number of people mixing ahk in minox solution, never heard anything direct about them cross reacting but a number of people suggest not to combine the two as they thought it was less efecttive .

The Mentalist, here is a link to some PG http://www.amazon.com/Essential-Depot-PROPYLENE-GLYCOL-PINT-Propylene-Glycol/dp/B005F5KYM4/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343151543&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=prolyene+glycol

Sc,

that pg is expensive. Can you tell me if 50% of ethy alcohol, maybe 30% of glycerine, and 20% of water would be ideal for any such mix?

If you are in the US, can you name a store that might carry PG or should I just go for glycerin instead?

Are people really applying a solution with 50% alcohol to their heads?! IMO, this is madness. Regular topical application of alcohol induces cell apoptosis (death). If there are any negative side-effects to this topical concoction, the first thing that I would point a finger at is the alcohol as opposed to the copper tri-peptides. I had a study years ago that spoke of topical application, but have no idea where it is now...even so, there are numerous alcohol/cell apoptosis-related studies out there:

"Ethanol promotes T cell apoptosis through the mitochondrial pathway"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1782900/

While it may not directly affect hair fall-out in the short-term, by inducing cell apoptosis, alcohol accelerates the "aging program". Aging is the loss of operational cells over time....while your hair count may stay the same while using a heavy concentration of alcohol in your topical, you are gradually losing functional stem cells in the follicle. It's a slow process, but in essence, you trade in short-term gains for long-term, irreversible damage. So, while hair count may not be affected immediately, mitochondria and DNA certainly are getting negatively impacted. Alcohol/Ethanol can also result in moisture being drained from the scalp, resulting in dry, irritated and possibly enflamed skin (add in allergic reactions to ethanol which many of us have as well, and that's another source of inflammation..).


_________________
Interested in a Laser Helmet, or curious about how you can utilize LLLT (Low-Level Laser Therapy) treatments in our fight against Hair Loss in general? Then, by all means, feel free to drop me a private message!!!

nidhogge

Posts : 2155
Join date : 2008-07-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  JZ on Tue Jul 31, 2012 6:48 am

This...is a good point. What are your thoughts about propylene glycol?

JZ

Posts : 42
Join date : 2011-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  JZ on Mon Oct 22, 2012 6:05 pm

I thought I should make an update, although I don't have anything super exciting to report.

It's been about eight months since I started using AHK. In that time, new vellus hairs have appeared, gradually become longer, and become semi-terminal. Since my last post, the uppermost hairs in my temples have become terminal, and the hairs below that have reached about 3/4" long. The lowermost hairs are about 1/4" long. Most of the hairs in my temples are still not as thick as normal hairs, but they are pigmented. A few new terminal hairs below my terminal hairline have also appeared in the last month or so. There's definitely been a noticeable cosmetic improvement since I started, even though these new hairs are shorter and thinner than the other hairs on my head. I guess if I were to buzz all my hair down to 3/4", it would look like a diffuse NW 0.5 or even a receding NW 0.

I think I've got a good sense of how well AHK works now. It seems like there's a continuous improvement, but it's a very slow process. At this rate, it'll probably be another six months at least, maybe a year, before all the hairs become truly terminal and I have a genuine NW 0. Unless something unexpected happens, I think that this can be my final update, because I don't anticipate having anything exciting to report for a long time.

I think this is how it works. AHK restores subcutaneous fat and also the vascular network. I don't think it affects the hair follicles directly, except to reverse fibrosis. But I don't think it directly stimulates them. Now, I know there's still a lot of chicken-and-egg debate about fat/vascular network and healthy hair follicles, which one causes the other. Personally I think it probably works both ways. In the case of AHK, I think it reestablishes the fat/vascular network, and for a while, the hair follicles just sit there, no difference. But eventually, more blood starts reaching the hair follicles, they gradually start growing a bit more, and this in turn stimulates more vascular development and subcutaneous fat regeneration. (This idea is supported by the fact that, with me, new terminal hairs seem to appear mostly next to existing terminal hairs, even those that are isolated from my hairline.) And then I think it takes multiple hair cycles, with the hairs becoming stronger each time, before the hairs truly become terminal. So it's slow.

I should mention although I was brushing obsessively for a while, I've since stopped doing this so regularly, and still improvement has continued. Nonetheless, I think brushing is useful. In fact, I think it basically works that same way that AHK does. But it's interesting to see that AHK can work on its own too.

I'm lucky that although I started losing hair when I was a teenager, it has been very gradual. People with more aggressive hair loss than I have may have to wait a lot longer to see an improvement, and maybe AHK won't help them on its own -- or maybe it will, I really don't know! It definitely can't hurt.

All right, that's it from me. But fire questions if you want.

JZ

Posts : 42
Join date : 2011-12-30

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: AHK-Cu by itself ... my experience so far

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum